Navajo Nation farm board bill hits snag

Copyright © 2008
Gallup Independent
By Kathy Helms
Diné Bureau

WINDOW ROCK — A resolution that would change the plan of operation of the Navajo Nation’s farm boards didn’t fly during Council’s fall session, but sponsors have until winter session to get supporting resolutions from chapters.

One of the most controversial parts of the resolution, sponsored by Norman John II of Twin Lakes, would give the boards “the power to discourage land use permits and farm lands from being encroached upon from home sites, burials, churches, business sites, advertisements, real estate and urban development.”

After much debate among Council members, Roy Laughter said that when the legislation came before the Government Services Committee in March, they asked for chapter resolutions. Ervin Keeswood, chair of GSC, agreed. “This definitely needs to go back to the public and get input from the communities.” He offered a motion to table the resolution until winter session, which passed 43-23.

Speaker Lawrence Morgan said there are 110 chapters and asked Keeswood to specify from which communities he wanted the support resolutions. “All communities that have rain and farming,” Keeswood responded.

Ron Jones of the Department of Agriculture said afterward, “One big measure in the bill was to prevent illegal burials on farm lands. Given traditional Navajo ways, who would bury on plots that provide a sacred essence of our ceremonies — corn pollen?

“The elderly have told that to build anything on a farm plot is a taboo. This is true because in days of old, Navajo was nomadic and resorted to protecting areas of prime cultivation for winter caches. The Navajo survived the Great Depression of the 1930s as a result of subsistence farming and ranching. Today, Wall Street has passed that Great Depression.” He said they will work to get support resolutions by winter session.

During debate on the proposed legislation, Johnny Naize recommended the language be changed to give farm boards the power to “prohibit” rather than “discourage” land use permits, etc. After lengthy discussion, the amendment failed 22-45.

Edward Jim said that throughout the United States of America, “They live on their farmland, they have access to water, irrigation, all of that. I think it’s better that the people who have homes and farmland live on their farm and utilize it, develop it. I don’t think they should be discouraged from using it.”

Leonard Anthony questioned what the enforcement process would be to prohibit illegal burials. “Anytime an individual passes away, do we need to send a message to all the funeral homes and let them know that there is a law on the Navajo Nation that’s being implemented here on burial sites?”

Delegate Orlanda Smith-Hodge, daughter of a farmer and raised on farmland, said, “We have a lot of farmers that already have homesteads on their farmland. What’s going to happen to some of these residents that already have homes on these farm plots?”

In a strategic move, Keeswood asked to see documents that pertain to farming. “Where in Navajo law, or federal law as pertains to Navajo, does it say that Navajos have to have farm permits in order to farm? There are many farmers out there that don’t even have farm permits, but people still farm because they’ve always farmed those areas.

“The Navajo Council and others always say, ‘You have to have a home site lease.’ That’s not true. You can build a home anywhere you want as long as your relatives in that area say it’s not a problem. You don’t have to have a home site lease. It’s only when you use federal funds, then you have to have a home site lease to use those funds.”

Naize challenged Keeswood’s request for documents.

“The people that have been farming in an area which they don’t have a permit to use are the people that recognize the tradition.” He said the information Keeswood asked for “is something that is unwritten at this time.”